#but just please remember native people or people of any ethnic minority as not a monolith and neither is their culture

[insectduck]

Do I or do I not pick a fight with white pjo fans who keep disregarding Piper's indigenous identity by insisting on labeling her sexuality and gender ?

Ughhhhhh it's getting really frustrating at this point, if you're going to create content about characters who are ethnic minorities just please make sure you're doing it in a respectful way and if you're unsure please research it do not keep bothering us to do the labor for you and explain the impacts of colonization on our culture over and over again we are tired of holding your hand

[askaceattorney]

These are letters regarding the situation that recently transpired. After this, we will no longer be answering any letters regarding politics. All of us agree that this blog needs to strictly stay out of politics. In truth, politics should never have been the center of this blog. After this, any letter regarding politics or the situation will be deleted.

This is a blog that focuses on answering letters to Ace Attorney canon characters. It does not discriminate anyone or any mod based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, politics, etc. and such actions are not tolerated. If you believe one of our mods is discriminating for whatever reason, show solid evidence and we will handle this privately. A support for a former or current president of a country is not proof of discrimination and neither are political memes posted on a personal account.

(More Politics Ahead)

Dear rogertheegg,

Co-Mod: Nope. Everyone’s welcome here, regardless of political leanings.  I’m afraid I’m as clueless as you are about what exactly happened with the two former Mods (they didn’t even say anything to me about it), but it’s all water under the bridge as far as I’m concerned.

Mod Edgeworth: Absolutely not! I have never tolerated political discrimination. You are allowed to believe whatever politics you want.

Dear kunaiman,

Co-Mod: High five.

Mod Edgeworth: Thank you very much for your support.

Dear Mistakes,

Mod Edgeworth: I’m not going to go into anything else regarding my politics, but I will state my reason for outing myself: I’m doing this for Co-Mod.  I do consider him a friend of sorts and I do not wish for him to have to suffer this blowback alone. So, if you want to state your grievances, go ahead.

Know this though, I am still the same mod you have met and have never hidden my character from any of you. My politics do not define my character and neither does Co-Mod’s politics define his character. The same goes for anyone else. I’m just someone that leans Conservative and voted for Trump. If that makes me a bad person, even if I do stand against any discrimination, then I will gladly accept it.

Co-Mod: So, here’s the truth about me, Donald Trump, the MAGA Committee, etc. (and this is from the horse’s mouth, so anyone who says otherwise is lying) -- I’ve never been a huge fan of the guy, but I supported the good things he did and wanted to do during his presidency -- creating jobs, draining the political swamp, promoting patriotism, and so on -- and for that, I feel no shame.  I also wished he could’ve kept his big mouth shut about a lot of things, but overall, I saw him as someone who stood up for people who’d been largely ignored before he came along -- namely, middle class Americans. If you see him and his presidency differently, I won’t hold anything against you for it, so I respectfully ask that you do the same for me.

Dear Anonymous,

Mod Edgeworth: Don’t worry, I know who you are. You maybe under anonymous, but when we receive your letter, it isn’t anonymous lol. What we do is place your letter in photoshop and get rid of all your identity. Thank you for your support and I agree.

This blog will continue, even if it’s under a very few of us. I will allow everyone to display their grievances in the comment section. They have just as much right as Co-Mod and I do.

If there’s anyone I wish for you to support, it’s Co-Mod. He’s the one being the most effected by all of this. I don’t believe politics should have been involved or that we should have to justify why we believe in our politics. Neither have to do with our love for Ace Attorney.

Dear I’m still surprised,

Mod Edgeworth: I’m guessing this is for Co-Mod, because it doesn’t seem like you’ve read my own defense. I literally stated that both Co-Mod and I support LGBT and that the letters deleted because of shipping had nothing to do with any political beliefs. Beyond what I stated in my defense (despite what Co-Mod states below), I won’t say anything more. Non of us have to justify why we support a former president. I have my reasons just like anyone else. It doesn’t make me a terrible person and I will forever stand for everyone’s rights to believe whatever politics they believe.

Co-Mod: It’s a shame I have to say this on an Ace Attorney blog of all places, but where is your proof that I or anyone on my side of the aisle takes any enjoyment in seeing anyone dead or oppressed, whether in a minority or otherwise?  I can only assume you’ve been listening to some skewed sources, or that there’s something huge I’m missing, because I’ve yet to see any right-wing groups reach that level of hatred.  (And if you know of any, please fill me in.  I mean that honestly.)

As for why I left same-sex attraction out of this blog, it’s simply because I see it as a divisive topic rather than a simply controversial one, (i.e. the death penalty, game piracy, etc.).  I’ve also proven several times that I’m not very good at addressing it without people getting rubbed the wrong way, so I decided to play it safe and not discuss it at all.  I’m happy to talk about it anywhere else, but a blog about Ace Attorney didn’t seem like the right place for it to me.  On top of that, there are plenty of blogs about peoples’ same-sex ships all over Tumblr, so why complain about this one?  If there’s a rule stating that Ace Attorney-themed Tumblr blogs are required to include those ships, I sure haven’t heard it.

I’ll admit this much -- like Phoenix, it’s something I can’t claim to understand, so maybe I still have some learning to do about it, but if I’m going to be accused of bigotry, I’d like to see some solid evidence of it.  Assumptions don’t count in my book.

Dear Dailystir,

Mod Edgeworth: Thank you. I’m not going to address anymore than I already have. I will not and refuse to mention anything else on my politics. Just like how you said, I am more at the center in the political world. I lean more Conservative, but I am Independent. I consider both Republicans and Democrats to be two different wings from the same bird.

I’m also glad you do not consider being a Trump supporter to be in the same basket as being a racist, bigot or any of that. These days, I can declare myself as a supporter of Andrew Jackson (I’m not btw) and not be against Natives, even though he was the reason for the mass genocide of thousands of Native Americans. I can openly support Martain Luther King, yet not be considered homophobic, even though he was against LGBT. I can consider myself a Bill Clinton supporter and not support raping women, even though that’s what he did in office. Yet, the moment I declare myself a Trump supporter, I’m automatically Anti LGBT, a bigot, a sexist, a racist and a phobe of some sort, because Trump supposedly is? What a world we live in! I can’t remember the last time supporting a political figure or celebrity made you a terrible person.

As for Mod Vera and Mod Maya, I still wish they could’ve said something to me or Co-Mod, if they truly felt uncomfortable. I’m still willing to talk to either of them and hear them out. I don’t blame them for doing what they did. I don’t know them or what life they live in. I have talked to someone, who had faced bigotry  and hate from Trump supporters in their area to the point of fear. I’ve even seen a Trump supporter bully an Anti Trump Supporter and I ended up reporting the bully, then calling them out for their behavior. I can say from experience that when you face real discrimination, it puts you in a state of fear to never express yourself or your identity. My family faced that and so did I. It’s the reason I’ve never revealed my race, gender or sexual orientation and can understand where Mod Maya and Mod Vera are coming from.

I think the real takeaway is to not judge anyone based on their politics, but also to not hate anyone who does. You will find bigotry on any side of the political spectrum from any group. To say there is none on any side is spouting ignorance.

Dear Anonymous,

Mod Edgeworth: It is sad, though even if I do understand where Mod Vera and Mod Maya are coming from, I still can’t justify them not talking to either of us first. They never spoke to either of us and assumed the worst out of both of us. They never asked us anything or mentioned their concerns. I’m certain, even now, they’re still assuming things.

Had they mentioned their grievances, I would have been willing to talk with them and work things out, but we were never given that chance. It kinda hurts, because they said they understood when I told them I was staying out of politics and was willing to admit that I supported Trump and am an Independent Conservative. Then, they pull the rug from under us and claim we are against ethnic minorities and LGBT. That’s why I wish they could’ve said something.

I’m still willing to talk to either of them, but I doubt they’ll want to hear from me. No amount of context is going to change that. If it did, they would’ve talked to me about it before leaving.

-The Mods

P. S. Co-Mod: As ugly as this can of worms is, it’s been a fun practice in defending my beliefs and decisions.  Never underestimate that skill, everyone.

Mod Edgeworth: I still can’t believe this was brought out at all. I’m so sick of politics!

[galaxycerebri]

To this day I wonder why I made Xiaojun, the protag of Requiem, Chinese. The culture/her ethnicity doesn't take a focus, and I'm not Chinese so I worry that if it were a focus I may get something wrong. And yet, I chose to make my protagonist Chinese, regardless of this.

For all intents and purposes, I could have just made Jun white and called it a day. On the other hand, I could have made her black, or even Somalian like myself, because to some degree Xiaojun is a projection of myself in the vein that she, Amelie and Maria were created in a time of emotional upheaval for me and I originally designed Jun off my apathy, Amelie on my anxiety and Maria off what I wanted to be (someone strong and stable like my sister) before I realised that Maria's state of being wasn't healthy either.

But yeah, I could have made her any ethnicity because it doesn't really factor into the story.

Recently I watched a video essay on the "ideal body" or something akin to that by Khadija Mbowe (someone please correct me in notes, and provide a name, I can't find it again and I really wanna watch the video again), and I have the attention span of a spoon. So I internalise things very quickly and depending on the situation, I can either hold onto it or not.

And I spent a lot of the time around starting Requiem (at the time Hunter X Spirit, about... 5 years ago, wow) reading Chinese web novels and comics and such. So I think perhaps I internalised that and just went with it, since even before then I spent so much time consuming East Asian culture because of my older sister.

I couldn't get into the serialised dramas and soap opera styled shows (gossip girl, PLL,) things my classmates would watch because I couldn't access them. And when my family finally got Sky tv, my younger brothers would hold onto the remote and we would watch (1) channel day in and day out (Disney XD) for years. I wish I was kidding.

As a result, I just never got into general tv shows. And my sister at the time was going through her anime phase, so the only real opportunity for me to experiment with the content that I wanted to enjoy, was through her laptop or novels and manga that I also got from her.

By the time I got a phone, it kinda just stuck. The first western tv show I remember choosing to watch (outside of merlin and dr who, that I would watch with my family) was Castle iirc.

It was easier to find anime streaming sites than it was to find streaming sites for western shows because streaming wasn't so big back then and any site that I could find was swiftly taken down because of copyright laws. I suppose borders kept anime pirating safe?

Moreover, Somali content was hard for me to access. A lot of it was poorly redubbed Bollywood tv shows, and movies, and I wasn't really into those huge set pieces and overdramatisation (props to them though, honestly that must be so hard to shoot). That's not even to take into account the fact that over the years of me codeswitching and trying to assimilate, I lost my grip on Somali language and now that I'm nearly 20, you couldn't even call me a native speaker.

I think all of these things:

- consuming east asian media growing up

- my hyperfixation on serialised chinese fictional content (webnovels/comics) around the time I started planning Requiem

- the lackluster grip I have on my own culture which resulted in me feeling like an imposter whenever I try to partake in Somali things

Kinda resulted in Xiaojun being Chinese. This, in general, has no bearing on the plot but like-- interesting.

On the one hand, because I’m British and so far haven’t experienced (at least to my face) the brutal racism that is found in America (the uk loves it’s microagressions and gaslighting you into thinking it’s not even a problem), I don't feel comfortable writing a black character because people will expect that overt racism. And I don't want to write a white character, because I will never understand that level of privilege, and while I can consciously point it out I never want to empathise with it. This pushes the onus onto a character of Asian descent which isn't great to say the least, more so with the rise in Asian hate and crimes directed against those of Asian descent.

On the other hand, I guess a part of me is trying to call back to days of innocence and naivete from my childhood years, as the initial planning for Requiem (then called Hunter X Spirit) happened when I was a baby teenager. 

And while, certainly, you can't say racism isn't a thing as it most definitely is, I know myself and a few others I have talked to would like something where race isn't punching you in the face as a theme. (Case in point, Bridgerton, wherein my buddies and I were excited about just having black people in that kind of setting without it being questioned only for them to drop that one line about a black/mixed race woman marrying a king and then acting like that solved all the racial issues of the period). And that we would like characters of minority background being present without it being questioned, or being considered "ticking a box."

Lemme know your thoughts.

[nightcoremoon]

ancestry blood tests to see what country you're from isn't exclusively a white people thing, it's a colonial american thing. europeans have the privilege of tracing their genealogy through hundreds and hundreds of years. they know their culture. we don't. white americans, black americans, even some latin americans. white americans don't know whether we're german or french or dutch or irish or spanish or english or whatever because all the immigrants escaped religious persecution to live in filth and squalor but at least filth and squalor free of religious intolerance (never mind the fact that we did so at the expense of the natives who were here first and murdered for the sake of colonialism) and fucked the shit out of each other so hard and so much that since government was a goddamn trainwreck back then there weren't systems in place, and since everyone died of fucking typhoid and dysentery at like 25 we lost many stories handed down through the family of where we came from. and I don't even need to explain the perils that africans faced when they were shipped here in chains to be our slaves: we stripped them of identity and culture and killed the dissenters and stole the women and children, brainwashing them into being subservient. by the time they regained some semblance of independence in the 1900s there was hundreds of years of slavery to weed through, and now most black people don't get to have an ethnic identity beyond the color of their skin. nigeria? morocco? tunisia? chad? kenya? sudan? the congo? they probably couldn't tell you. asians and middle easterners usually know considering the circumstances of their introduction to america was a bit different than that of europe and africa, since their culture operates differently than westerners, but that isn't an ethnic issue. it isn't because they're asian or middle eastern, it's because their culture is more familial-centric; because it's different.

so while I won't argue that having easier access to tools used to find your bloodlines is certainly a byproduct of white privilege. that's actually true as evident by having common sense and looking at the world around you. but wanting to know where your great-grandparents are from? that doesn't seem cringe to me. I myself have the privilege of knowing: 25% anglo/franc, 12% irish, 25% german, 25% italian, 12% ??? (i have a great-grandfather who was adopted as an orphaned child), and like 2% cherokee which doesn't mean anything besides I have a great-grandfather who fucked a cherokee woman. I have the privilege of knowing where I came from despite being a white american. my cultural identity is still that of a white american, and my ethnic identity doesn't change that. it's just a cool thing to know, like my zodiac sign, or my phenotype, or my blood type, or my favorite flavor of ice cream.

so I mean yeah joke about it "haha white people think there's a difference between swedish and swiss what a bunch of fucking cringe morons" if that makes you feel better about yourself, it doesn't bother me any. but that's because I already know. and when you say that, it is on principle the same thing as "haha black people think there's a difference between uganda and ethiopia, what a bunch of fucking cringe morons".

inb4 diD yOu jUsT cOmPaRe tHoSe tWo tHiNgS wOw hOw rAciSt

well I didn't compare the struggles of white and black people. I compared wanting to know what your ancestry was, in the context of people saying that wanting to know what your ancestry is is a "white people" thing. please don't be a clown. which now that I'm saying that I am now remembering the violently racist history of the origin of clowns so let me rephrase. don't be an idiot. which I sincerely hope isn't an ableist slur now so says the 12 year old discourse gremlins. although that is ageist and the concept of the gremlin has an antisemitic history... well fuck, now I'm questioning everything. THIS IS WHY HISTORY AND GENEALOGY ARE IMPORTANT.

but I digress. out of all the things white people do that are actually harmful to the world and ethnic minorities, having an interest in ancestral genealogy is the least of your concerns. it is literally on the same level as a white girl being into the zodiac. in fact it's even less harmful because white girls will kick someone out of a lease because they're a scorpio or whatever; even the very prospect of being prejudiced or discriminatory against an irish or italian person is all but disappeared, and even then it's only seen with backwoods redneck trailer trash "white purity" inbred neonazis who only really consider england, france, and germany to be ~real white~. and are we really gonna give a shit about the opinions of a degenerate like that? I sure won't.

tl;dr getting pissy about ancestral genealogy is a waste of your energy writing it and a waste of my energy scrolling past it so do us both a favor and grow a sense of humor.

[libraerie]

hey again, there’s no need to reply - i’ve wasted enough of your time! i know i don’t have much of a say because i’m not of this ethnicity and i absolutely respect your opinion, but surely she can be inspired by things and different cultures? i don’t really want to say ‘fashion statement’ because that’s insensitive but i thought we’d come to a point in the ‘fashion world’ where anyone can wear anything, as long as the meanings and significance are respected? idk, saying this is cultural +

appropriation seems a bit too much - are people not allowed to wear nose rings because it’s appropriating indian and african cultures? people inherently borrow from other cultures as inspiration - i absolutely understand the problem with gucci and their use of turbans because it’s such an important and sacred thing in their culture, but i don’t see how that compares to the outfits and the language? very sorry for bothering you again, maybe i’m just not seeing this in the right way idk.

i completely understand what you mean, and there’s no need to apologise! i’ll try to explain a bit more, but i need to disclaim (again): this is my personal stance on this, and in no way supposed to be normative.thank you for bringing up the gucci/turban thing. the fashion industry has been central aspect of many debates concerning cultural appropriation - here’s a really good article i found. 

you’re right, ariana’s behaviour can definitely not be considered more disrespectful than gucci’s use of turbans. but i wouldn’t disregard it at all just because of that comparison. it’s very hard to pull a line between what is cultural appropriation and what isn’t - especially when there are several different definitions/layers to examine; i do think, however, that anything people of the ethnic minority consider disrespectful should (at least) be made aware of and discussed.

i don’t remember saying anything about ariana’s outfits in my original post? and haven’t seen it discussed anywhere. if yes, please enlighten me. but her language in the lyrics of the 7 rings video is very close to that of afro-american people. and i don’t see myself in the place to go into this as i’m not black myself, but as several people have expressed their discomfort - especially given that she’s white and doesn’t have to face the harassment they have to face when using the same language, i do see it as problematic.

about the japanese language: it’s not really inspiration but more an adoption, because the song itself does not have any relation to the japanese culture (or even language) whatsoever; it is not at all essential, and thus being used for the aesthetic only. (we also see that by her disinterest in accurate translation. sorry for the constant repetition, but i really consider it to be quite a relevant aspect) many japanese & east asian people face racism because of the use of their native languages as well; not only taking advantage of it, but also using it completely out of context is something that i consider rather disrespectful & important to talk about. 

i adore ariana, and strongly believe that she is good at heart; i’m sure she’ll understand, learn from it, and grow. as she always does.

[pokemaniacal]

Something that’s been on my mind for a bit that your professional word may be able to help with. Would you happen to know how ethnically diverse the Greek and Roman empires were?

very

next question please

…

…what, you want more?  Oh, fine, but for the record this is not the sort of thing people just “happen to know.”

Okay so I’m assuming by “Greek empire” (remember, kids: there was never a politically autonomous and unified state called “Greece” or “Hellas” until 1822) you mean Alexander’s empire (320s BC) and the Hellenistic successor kingdoms (323 BC – 31 BC), and by “Roman empire” you mean Rome starting from the time it becomes a major interregional power (say, following the second Punic War, which ended in 201 BC) rather than just Rome in the time of the Emperors.  You could spend like most of a book on each of these just corralling the data that might let us answer this question, but whatevs.

Lesson one: the ancient Greeks and Romans did not think about ethnicity in the same way as we do.  In particular, they were not super hung up on the colour of people’s skin – skin colour in ancient art is more often a signifier of gender than race, because women are expected to spend less time outside and therefore have lighter skin (which is another whole thing that we shouldn’t even get into because this is an aristocratic ideal of female beauty and of course lots of Greek and Roman women would have worked outside).  Arguably the most important signifier of ethnicity to the Greeks and Romans was actually language, with everyone who didn’t speak Greek or Latin being a “barbarian” (traditionally this word is supposed to come from the Greeks thinking that all foreign languages sounded like “bar bar bar,” although I’ve also heard a convincing argument that it comes from the Old Persian word for taxpayer, barabara, and originally signified all subjects of the Persian king).

In the modern world we have designations of ethnicity that are super broad and grow in large part out of early and long-since-debunked anthropological theory that divided humanity into three biologically distinct races, Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid, and don’t really reflect a lot of important components of ethnicity.  The thing is, as the internet will happily tell you ad nauseam, race is a social construct.  Like, yes, designations of race describe real physical characteristics that arise from variation within human genetics, but the way we choose to bundle those characteristics is arbitrary, and where we choose to draw the lines is arbitrary (like, for a long time in the US, Greeks and Italians weren’t considered “white,” but today they definitely are, even though nothing changed about their genetics).  If we today were brought face to face with a bunch of ancient Greeks and Romans, we would probably be pretty comfortable with assigning a majority of them to the big pan-European tent of modern “whiteness,” but if you had asked them about it, they certainly would not have felt any kinship with the pale-skinned people of northern and western Europe from whom most English-speaking white people today are descended.  Those people were every bit as barbarian (and every bit as fair game for enslavement, for that matter) as the darker-skinned folk of the Middle East and North Africa.  Ancient Greeks and Italians also had loads of internal ethnic divisions – like, the Latins (the central Italian ethnic group to which the Romans belonged) were a different thing from the Umbrians to their east, the Etruscans to the north and the Oscans to the south.  In Greece, you had Dorians in the Peloponnese, Ionians in Attica and Asia Minor, Boeotians and Thessalians in central Greece, Epirotes in western Greece, and DON’T EVEN ASK about the Macedonians, because boyyyyyyyyy HOWDY you are NOT ready for that $#!tstorm.  The point is, race and ethnicity can be basically anything that you think makes you different from the people in another community.

So yeah, Alexander’s empire.  Alexander the Great conquered Persia, which was already the largest empire the world had ever seen at the time and incorporated dozens of ethnically distinct peoples (including many Greeks of Asia Minor, some of whom willingly fought against Alexander) through a philosophy of loose regional governance and broad religious tolerance.  Now, here’s the thing: Alexander had no idea how to run an empire of that scale.  No Greek did.  No one alive in the world did – except for the Persians.  Alexander didn’t have anything to replace the Persian systems of governance or bureaucracy, so… he didn’t.  Individual Persian governors were usually given the opportunity to swear loyalty to him and keep their posts; vacant posts were filled with Macedonians, but the hierarchy was basically untouched.  Alexander himself married a princess from Bactria (approximately what is now Afghanistan), Roxana, and had a kid with her, and encouraged other Macedonian nobles to take Persian wives as well, to help unify the empire.  Unfortunately Alexander, of course, had to go and bloody die less than two years after he’d finished conquering everything, and tradition holds that on his deathbed he told his friends that the empire should go “to the strongest,” which was an incredibly dumb thing to say and caused literally decades of war, which we are not even going to talk about because it is the most Game of Thrones bull$#!t in the history of history.  All you need to know is that when the dust settled there were basically three major Greco-Macedonian dynastic powers: the Antigonids in Greece, the Ptolemies in Egypt, and the Seleucids in Persia.

In terms of ethnic makeup the Antigonid kingdom is in principle the most straightforward because they’re basically still running the same Greece that Alexander’s father had conquered.  Even then, you should bear in mind that a) most Greek cities had legal provisions for allowing foreigners to live there under certain conditions (“foreigners” often meant Greeks from other cities, but in principle could be anyone), and b) the Greeks had a lot of slaves (many of whom were, again, Greeks from other cities, because that’s fine in ancient Greek morality, but a lot of them would have come from all over the place), and even though the Greeks didn’t count slaves as “people” or consider them a real part of a city’s ethnic composition, WE SHOULD.  The Ptolemaic kingdom in Egypt seems to have had a relatively small Greco-Macedonian upper class ruling over a native Egyptian, Libyan and Nubian peasant majority.  Members of that ruling class seem to have been kind of snobbish about any mixing between the two – only the very last Ptolemaic ruler, Cleopatra VII (yes, that Cleopatra), even bothered to learn the Egyptian language.  However, the Ptolemaic rulers did make some important cultural gestures of goodwill towards the Egyptians.  They took the native title of Pharaoh, which previous foreign rulers of Egypt hadn’t, and adopted a lot of traditional Pharaonic iconography like the double crown.  They also worshipped some of the most important Egyptian gods, most notably Isis, and may have kind of… deliberately created a new Greco-Egyptian god, Serapis, by blending together Osiris and Dionysus (Serapis actually becomes super important in the Roman period and is widely worshipped even outside Egypt).  And then there’s the Seleucids, an empire that did nothing but slowly collapse from the moment it was established.  They have a rough time of it because they have the largest land area to cover and dozens of distinct ethnic groups to bring together, and it doesn’t help that they kinda keep doing the Game of Thrones thing for about two hundred fµ¢&ing years.  They often get a bad rap in history and have a reputation for oppressing the non-Greek populations of their empire, but that’s probably at least partly because some of our most important sources for the Seleucids are Jewish, and the Seleucid kings’ relationship with the Jews broke down in a fairly spectacular fashion during the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (r. 175-164 BC).  It’s not clear whether that’s representative of the Seleucids’ normal relationship with their subject peoples, or a worst case scenario.  Also, the Seleucids tend to get painted as villains in the historical record by both the other Greek powers and the Romans, and never really get much of a chance to defend themselves because we don’t have Seleucid histories.  What is clear is that they inherited all the ethnic and religious diversity of the Persian Empire, and most of their rulers were half-Persian because they followed Alexander’s example by marrying into the Persian nobility.  After an initial period of conflict they also seem to have maintained cordial relations with the Mauryan Empire of India, their neighbour to the east, for several decades, and contemporary Indian sources talk about sending Buddhist missionaries into Seleucid lands, so… like, there might have been a bunch of Greek Buddhists running around the empire; that’s a thing.

Whew.  Okay, so that is a criminally brief answer to-

OH CHRIST YOU ASKED ABOUT THE ROMANS AS WELL

WHAT DO YOU PEOPLE WANT FROM ME

Right.  Romans.  One of the major schools of thought on how the Romans were able to create such an enormous and long-lasting empire in the first place is that their openness to accepting foreigners into their community gave them an enormous manpower advantage over every other ancient Mediterranean state.  Greek politics generally operates on the level of cities; even in the age of Alexander, individual cities have quite a lot of legislative autonomy.  Citizenship is also something that works on the level of cities: you aren’t a citizen of, say, the Seleucid Empire; you’re a citizen of Antioch, or Tyre, or Babylon, or whatever.  But then the Romans happen.  The Romans are weird, because they will sometimes just declare that all the people of an allied city are now also citizens of Rome.  In the early period of Rome’s expansion in the central Mediterranean, this meant (or so the theory goes) that they could draw upon larger citizen armies and sustain more casualties than their rivals.  This is how they beat Pyrrhus, the Greek king of Epirus (r. 297-272 BC), when he invaded Italy in response to disputes between Rome and the Greek colony of Tarentum; this is how they beat Hannibal, the legendary Carthaginian general, even after he annihilated the largest army the Romans had ever fielded at Cannae during the second Punic War (218-201 BC).  Now, at this point they are basically still just bringing in Italians, which we might consider ethnically homogenous even if they didn’t, but there’s more.

Once they really start to get going, the Romans enfranchise entire provinces at a time, like when the emperor Claudius (r. AD 41-54) decided to make everyone in Gaul (modern France, more or less) a Roman citizen.  The really interesting thing about this particular decision is that we actually have a copy of the speech he made to the Senate in Rome at the time, so we can examine his rationale.  Claudius’ argument is basically that being inclusive has always been what has made Rome stronger than its rivals, going right back to their mythological past, when Romulus populated his city with disenfranchised criminals from other communities (and, uh… women that they kidnapped from the next town over).  The Romans believed that everything great about their civilisation had originally been learned or borrowed from someone else – metalworking and irrigation from the Etruscans, infantry combat from the Greeks, shipbuilding from the Carthaginians, etc – so it wasn’t a huge stretch for them to believe that all these people should eventually become part of Rome as citizens (well… the ones who weren’t killed or enslaved in the conquest, anyway – no one ever said the Romans were saints).

The reason Claudius feels he needs to justify all this to the Senate is that citizenship (rather than any of the forms of semi-citizen rights that Romans would sometimes grant to their allies) will make rich Gauls eligible to become Senators themselves, and occupy other high-level posts like provincial governorships.  The decision affects the ethnic composition of the Senate, so even though he doesn’t actually need their permission to do it, he asks as a courtesy (the emperors’ relationship with the Senate is a weird and complicated thing).  Even without being a citizen, you could actually do a great deal in the Roman government in Claudius’ time.  Many of the most important jobs in the empire were ones that had existed during the age of the Republic, when Rome was theoretically a democracy, and all of those were restricted to citizens even after they stopped being elected positions – but there was also an imperial bureaucracy that answered directly to the emperor and his aides, and he was free to choose literally anyone to fill those positions.  As a result, a lot of emperors deliberately picked slaves and former slaves for loads of senior positions, specifically because their lack of citizen rights meant that they could never be political rivals, and because they were a useful counterbalance to the power of the blue-blooded Roman aristocracy.  And, again, slaves can be from basically anywhere.  A lot of these administrative slaves were Greeks, because Greek education provided useful skills for running the imperial bureaucracy that the Romans themselves often didn’t have, but emperors could and did commission literally anyone for these positions.

Eventually the emperor Caracalla (r. AD 211-217) just decided it wasn’t worth keeping track anymore and declared that every freeborn person in the entire empire, which by that point stretched from northern England to Morocco to Romania to Jordan, was now a Roman citizen.  All of these people are now “Romans,” regardless of their language or culture or religion; the only criterion is that they not be slaves or former slaves (and even if they’re former slaves, their children will be Roman citizens).  And these people can move, in ways that were never possible before the Empire existed, because Rome is the first – and so far the last – political entity ever to unite the entire Mediterranean region, which allows them to wipe out piracy almost completely and jump-start trade and travel in ways that would never happen again for over a thousand years.  My own research on Roman glass has led me to encounter glassblowers with Syrian or Jewish names working in northern Italy – people who were probably integral to spreading the technology of glassblowing to western Europe.  The Roman army also moves people around – like, a lot.  You might enlist in your home town in Syria, then serve on Hadrian’s wall and retire in northern England – in fact, we know that this happened because we’ve found stuff like inscriptions in the Aramaic language in Roman Britain.

Also Rome had, like… a whole dynasty of African emperors one time.  Septimius Severus (r. AD 193-211) and his successors were part Italian, part Punic (of Carthaginian descent – ultimately Middle Eastern, since the Carthaginians were originally a Phoenician colony) and part Berber (native North African), and Severus grew up in what is now Tunisia.  And that wasn’t really a big deal for the Romans, 1) because Severus’ Italian ancestry made him a Roman citizen, which trumps all other signifiers of ethnicity, and 2) Rome had already had a couple of emperors of Iberian (= Spanish) descent by this point who were considered some of the best ever, and the Iberians are just as “barbarian” as the Berbers as far as Rome is concerned.  Other Roman emperors of varied ethnicities include Philip (Arabian), Diocletian (Illyrian), the three Gordians (probably Cappadocian), and Elagabalus (Syrian, and incidentally the gayest Roman of all time; like, normally I would warn you to be super cautious about using modern labels like “straight” and “gay” for Romans because they just didn’t think about sexual orientation in those terms, but I make an exception here because Elagabalus was super gay).

Oh, and just because someone will definitely bring it up if I don’t, there was a big fuss in the news a few years back because someone discovered the skeletons of what they claimed were Chinese people living in, of all places, Roman Britain.  And to me, one Chinese family in Britain in the first century AD is not particularly a dramatic stretch of plausibility (a handful of people could easily slip through the historical record and just never be mentioned), but the evidence in this particular case falls some way short of “proof.”  There’s chemical data that suggests these individuals grew up somewhere far away from Britain, which is well and good, but the thing that points specifically to China is not the isotopic analysis but a study of bone morphology, and trying to determine someone’s ethnicity on the basis of what their bones look like, on the universal scale of things that are sketchy, ranks “sketchy as all fµ¢&.”  Again, I’m happy to believe that they exist, because China (Seres in Latin) and Rome (Dà-Qín in Chinese) definitely knew about each other, and we occasionally find Roman artefacts and coins in eastern Asia, or Chinese artefacts in the eastern Roman Empire, but the specific evidence for these individuals isn’t there, in my opinion.

…that was a brief answer.  Let it stand as a warning to others.

[thanatos5150]

On Heritage and the Sins of our Pasts

There’s been some murmurings from the political spheres I follow recently about Elizabeth Warren’s little stunt where she had a DNA test to prove she is of Native American heritage. None of them are full of particularly nice things to say about the woman, and I’ve been sitting out on weighing in because my feelings are big and complex and don’t fit neatly into a tweet or a toot, and as soon as I get the thesis out of my mouth I’m feeling relatively sure that somewhere, somehow, that’s going to be read first and I’m going to spend so much time replying to tweets/toots in response that I’m not going to be able to get into the complex details.

And, because this is, apparently, the only thing which gives anybody any sort of weight or importance in their takes, I have to establish these up front: yes, I actually have a dog in this fight. One: I am a resident of Massachusetts. Warren is my Senator.  I’ll be voting November 6th on whether or not to re-elect her. Two (and this is the big one): According to family lore, I am also of Native American heritage.

And I want to be very nuanced about that second one, because it’s where all of my complex feelings are coming from. As a child, my mother made a great and big deal about my brothers and me being what she called a weijo, a “half-blood”. She said that she was part Native American, and thus, we, too were Native American. And, as I was a child, I believed her implicitly. I believed her completely and totally and for a very, very long time. Well into adulthood, even. Now, I simply don’t believe pretty much anything she says or has said to me. That’s why I said “According to family lore up” there. I also said “Of Native American heritage,”. Please note that I’m not actually claiming to be Native American. I’m not saying I have any tribal affiliations or connection to Native American culture (despite Young Me desperately wanting to form such connections).

You know how, when filling out job applications, they have you tick the little boxes for diversity info about your ethnicity? Well, the first one of those diversity things I filled out, I filled out under the watchful eye of a US Navy recruiter. Of course, since I genuinely and truly believed I was of Native American heritage, I checked the little box next to Native American, and the recruiter made a big deal about it. Lots of “Are you actually...”s and “That’s so cool”s in that kind of weird, racially biased, but not necessarily negatively prejudiced lilt to the other recruiter in the office. Mostly, it was just dehumanizing, openly talking about how I was “his” recruit and how “bagging one” was so rare and this was going to make him look awesome.

A year or so later, in Japan, I would, for the first time, see the little line saying that by ticking that box, I affirmed that I maintained Tribal affiliations, and quietly file an update to that form with the Native American box unticked, amongst a few other minor changes that I honestly don’t remember what they were. Only that having something else to change was important to me, because it would smokescreen away the fact that I was no longer claiming to be Native American on an official government form.

Years and years ago, somehow, I don’t remember the specifics exactly, but some time after 2010, during the Obama administration, somebody got Elizabeth Warren to admit that, when she was in her youth, she used to claim Native America heritage on diversity forms because she thought it would help her get hired, and she clarified that she halted the practice a long time ago.

Warren is about as white-presenting as I am, so I shrugged my shoulders and carried on with my life, because my story is very, very similar. A bunch of racist assholes, however, did not. calling her an out and out liar, somebody who abused the “privileges” of Native Americans for her own gain, and she had to know she wasn’t actually Native American, and she had to be consciously lying about her heritage, because look at her. She’s obviously white.

And, sometimes, three or four years later, when I would sometimes tell the story about how I was raised to believe I was of Native American heritage, invariably, I would get interrupted. “Ha, just like Elizabeth Warren,”

And that’s when the very first, interrupting thought out of sombody’s mouth was  not saying I should “get some of that casino money”.

Fast forward to the wake of the 2016 election, where one of those racist assholes that won’t let go, like a dog worrying a bone, is Donald Trump, the current, sitting President of the United States of America. Trump acknowledges Warren as a political rival, even if he won’t come out and say it. And, because he’s a racist asshole, he preemptively attacks her character, calling out the Native American things she admitted, with shame, to doing in her past, and she stopped doing because she isn’t attached to the culture. Because she doesn’t maintain tribal affiliations. For the same reasons I quietly updated that form back in my first year or so of US Naval service.

Trump leaned into it, because it’s a thing his base loves. He saddled her with a racist nickname (”Pocahontas”), and pressed the issue. He challenged her, on national television, during a rally, to release a DNA test proving that heritage, and he’d give a million dollars to a charity of her choice. And it’s then, and only then, in response to what feels like, to me, over half a decade of taunting and scolding and racist attacks and accusations, that she finally releases a DNA test affirming only her heritage. She still does not claim affiliations with tribes. She still does not claim cultural connections. She does not claim a stake in reparations from the government. She does not even lay claim to the identity. Just the genetics that racist assholes -- and Donald Trump in particular, are pressuring her for in order to score cheap political points. In essence, she did nothing but call Trump’s bluff.

And liberals, of all people, are blowing up about it. While the GOP cronies are scrambling to call her a shameless liar, it’s liberals who are scrambling to call her an enemy of Native Americans and a lying, racist shit. For admitting to something she did in the past. For calling a racist asshole’s bluff. For seeking atonement to a sin in her past. She is not claiming cultural connections. She is not claiming tribal affiliations. All she’s claiming is genetics, after being asked to show genetics, and the GOP is calling her a damned dirty liar while liberals are calling her a racist shit.

And Trump is smugly laughing his ass off. Because he played all of you like fiddles.

[gringoslur]

honey, I'm south american.. the reason I only bring up the subject is because whites and mestizos in south america will get on their pedestals and clap their hands when the u.s. is being called out... which is literally all the time on this site, but will never make a peep about their own nations imperialistic ways. often times they will also try to escape their whiteness/white privilege through the ignorance that a lot of the anglo world has thinking latin americans are a homogenous race

so and coopt the opression that indigenous and black looking latin americans especially face. yeah, the other anon was right.. but you know why? because the u.s. has the resources to be this massive power.. trust me in the times some nations in south america had a similar degree of resources they did the same, during the brazilian empire the invasion of paraguay costed the population the majority of its male citizens, almost eradicating the guarani population that was left in the nation.

the rubber industry when the empire expanded into the amazon brought to the massacre of many indigenous people. and honestly, there are examples from the last 30 years all over latin america of literal genocide like targeted massacres of minority groups during wars and ethnic cleansing.. like via sterilization of indigenous and black people. my issue is that I only see people pointing blame at americans or the spaniards, french, or portuguese.. I never see any introspection at all..

ok.. so your argentine, if you want an example.. how about the fact that in the paraguayan war afro-argentines were purposely deployed.. because if black soldiers died as causalities, it would killing two birds with one stone? this literally (alongside an epidemic at the time, sure, but the war did more damage) lead to close to the entire afro-argentine population being eradicated as well.. so not only was the government partaking in imperialism but also ethnic cleansing of their own countrymen.

I’m not sure how many I sent sorry lol, I think 5… but I’m finished.. thank you for taking your time. Sorry, my annoyance was not with you but in general with many white (and mestizo) Latin Americans on tumblr who will smugly reblog things about the United States and their crimes, but sit silent about their own.

I’m gonna try to answer this the best way that i can, please tell me if i missed anything. And i’m talking with my personal thoughts, i’m not trying to represent latin americans…because i know that A LOT of what you said it’s true. 

I don’t feel like its “all the time”, because people talk shit about US because things that happen in US. Not so much about what US did to the world, and thats something that a lot of people don’t want to talk about or the country itself silenced people. I think that it’s ok to call out US and remind them about their history, but i don’t put myself (or my country) in a pedestal when i do it, if you ever feel like i did, i’m sorry and please, correct me. But you are right about everything else. 

Yes, i’ve seen latines trying to do that. That’s why i hate the thought that latines are “a race”. Some many people try to fight me in that topic, but they don’t realize that the argument of “we are one race” was already used in the history and present of Latinoamerica to not recognize the racism, colorism and the murder of black and native people here. Also, Latinomerica history and racial issues are more complicated than “white people are guilty for everything”. I call myself white even though my father isn’t white, but i personally don’t call europeans “colonizadores” or other people “white” because i have “white” blood too. And that white blood that you can recognize in my skin and features lets me be really privilaged in Latinoamerica. I’m a liar if i don’t recognize that.

Why people don’t talk about what happend/happens INSIDE of Latinoamerica?

I think that there’s different reasons. 

Yes, because of latines that don’t want to talk/accept/recognize that latines are also guilty of something and they don’t like being called out, knowing that what they consider they people also helped to destroy Latinoamerica. I can’t really speak for everyone, considering that i’m a “whitepassing” latina and i call myself white, but that’s a fact that no one can deny. But i don’t feel comfortable doing an “analysis” for every non-white latine because i’m not educated enough about it and it’s not my place.

I’ve noticed that a lot of latines don’t know about their own history. That’s why i always talk about how important it is to know the history of Latinoamerica and not only use the latine card in some situations. I’m not only speaking about a lot of latines in US that don’t even know the basic of the history of their country or in latinoamerica, but also latines IN latinoamerica. And for the latines in US, please try to look for good sources if you don’t speak spanish or portuguese. English sources tend to be…not so good. 

Everything that you mentioned, i knew about it (but there’s a lot of it that i don’t know, to be honest) I’m not saying that it’s common knowledge, because my country it’s pretty racist. But it wouldn’t be strange to hear a talk about this at least in my university. But still, every argentinian knows the name of “soldier Cabral”, but they don’t know that he was probably a black man, a slave. I thought about doing posts about it, but some things stopped me: here, is really weird that a post in spanish gets attention. the few sources of it (even documentaries) are in spanish, and i’m not fluid enough in english to translate them, i don’t want to misform people. I don’t trust english sources of the history of Latinoamerica, like i said. Can you talk to me in private about this? I think that you might be one of the people that i would trust helping me with this.

Don’t worry about it! I understand your feelings. I’m sorry if i reacted like that, it’s just that i’m used to get a lot of ugly asks when i talk about US (and that’s why we need to keep talking about it) but you are right, we need to remember OUR history as well. We should change that. And i’m sorry for making you wait for this answer, i had some issues. I’m gonna repeat something very important that you said:

My annoyance was (…) with many white (and mestizo) Latin Americans on tumblr who will smugly reblog things about the United States and their crimes, but sit silent about their own.

Non-latines, you can like and reblog but don’t comment (or tag comments) in this post. This isn’t your place. 

[automatismoateo]

A rant: I haven't spoken to my abusive parents in several years, and today I got an e-mail from my dad that was a random biblical verse. | Spoiler Alert: I got kinda mad. via /r/atheism

Submitted November 30, 2020 at 09:38PM by Obliterature (Via reddit https://ift.tt/2JdYlaY) A rant: I haven't spoken to my abusive parents in several years, and today I got an e-mail from my dad that was a random biblical verse. | Spoiler Alert: I got kinda mad.

My parents growing up were abusive and were the cause of various forms of trauma to my three siblings and I. My dad, a lapsed Catholic, decided he was a "Christian" again after Barack Obama was elected and started sinking into a far-right sinkhole of anti-intellectualism. My mother, is a right-wing Jew. What a combo, eh?

Anyway, I've been estranged from them for several years, because I couldn't handle their gaslighting, denial, and continuously crappy and toxic behavior. I told my Dad and Mom at the time that they would be back allowed in my life if they met certain conditions (seeking mental health treatment and committing to seeing through being the primary condition). Today, I get this e-mail quoting the Bible verse Psalms 95:6"

O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the LORD our maker.

I don't know what came over me, but I flipped out. I got angry. And I couldn't stop myself from writing him an e-mail back. This may be petty, but I just felt like I had to share it. Apologies if this doesn't belong here.

​

The E-Mail:

Oh, shit, are we trading favorite biblical verses now? Here’s a few of my favorites:

How about when Leviticus weirdly shames women for having periods?

" 'When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. 20 " 'Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. 21 Anyone who touches her bed will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 22 Anyone who touches anything she sits on will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 23 Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, they will be unclean till evening. 24 " 'If a man has sexual relations with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean. 25 " 'When a woman has a discharge of blood for many days at a time other than her monthly period or has a discharge that continues beyond her period, she will be unclean as long as she has the discharge, just as in the days of her period. 26 Any bed she lies on while her discharge continues will be unclean, as is her bed during her monthly period, and anything she sits on will be unclean, as during her period. 27 Anyone who touches them will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 28 " 'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. – Leviticus 15:19-28

Or that one where God tells Moses that the crippled and handicapped aren’t fit for his church?

The Lord said to Moses, 17 "Say to Aaron: 'For the generations to come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God. 18 No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; 19 no man with a crippled foot or hand, 20 or who is a hunchback or a dwarf, or who has any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged testicles. 21 No descendant of Aaron the priest who has any defect is to come near to present the food offerings to the Lord. He has a defect; he must not come near to offer the food of his God. 22 He may eat the most holy food of his God, as well as the holy food; 23 yet because of his defect, he must not go near the curtain or approach the altar, and so desecrate my sanctuary. I am the Lord, who makes them holy.' – Leviticus 21:16-23

This one ought to hit close to home: kill your sons who are stubborn and rebellious. Well, what are you waiting for, pops?

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid. - Deuteronomy 21:18-21

Ohhh, looks like any many who’s injured his cock and balls isn’t allowed in church either…I wonder if emasculation from wife counts? Is that why you never go to church?

No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the Lord. - Deuteronomy 23:1

Personally loving this one where men have permission to cut off a wife’s hand should she try to defend her husband.

If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity. - Deuteronomy 25:11-12

How about the one where God condones bashing babies against rocks?

Daughter Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is the one who repays you according to what you have done to us. 9 Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks. – Psalm 137.8-9

Or the one where God condones ripping babies to pieces, looting their parents’ houses and raping their mothers?

See, the day of the Lord is coming -a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger- to make the land desolate and destroy the sinners within it. 10 The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light. 11 I will punish the world for its evil, the wicked for their sins. I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty and will humble the pride of the ruthless. 12 I will make people scarcer than pure gold, more rare than the gold of Ophir. 13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble; and the earth will shake from its place at the wrath of the Lord Almighty, in the day of his burning anger. 14 Like a hunted gazelle, like sheep without a shepherd, they will all return to their own people, they will flee to their native land. 15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword. 16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives violated. – Isaiah 13:9-16

Hubba, hubba, Ezekiel!

There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. - Ezekiel 23:20

Oh damn, what about that time in Hosea when God’s all about baby-killing AND violently murdering pregnant women? I thought Christians opposed abortion?

"But I have been the Lord your God ever since you came out of Egypt. You shall acknowledge no God but me, no Savior except me…"You are destroyed, Israel, because you are against me, against your helper… The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open." - Hosea 13:4, 9, 16

And no examination of the Bible is complete without some New Testament Exodus shenanigans about selling your daughters into sexual slavery.

"If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. – Exodus 21:7-8

Tell me, Dad. Do you really think you know more about the Bible than I do? I literally majored in literature and the “classics” of western culture. I graduated Summa Cum Laude with a 3.99 GPA. I’m halfway through a masters degree on these kinds of ancient texts.

You, on the other hand, are a fake Catholic who rarely goes to church and has mindlessly hooked onto far-right & conservative talking points in your old age out of your reactionary racism to the election of a black man to the presidency.

What the fuck happened to you? The [CENSORED NAME] I remembered when I was growing up was an marginally intelligent and moderate thinking person capable of critical thinking. The [CENSORED NAME] I’ve seen devolve into the anti-intellectualism of American-Christian nationalism & conservatism since Barack Obama took office in 2008 has been an embarrassment to yourself, to your Jewish wife, and to your children. Get a fucking grip.

Your politics and your religion are centered around greed, prejudice, and the marginalization of ethnic, cultural, political, and religious minorities. Your fetishization of your personal “freedom” and “liberty” over the health, safety, and human rights of others is vile and repulsive, and it illustrates that your ideology extends to only caring about yourself and your immediate circle, rather than for the common good of all people. (Not very Christian, bro.)

All that aside, you know my conditions for allowing you and mom back into my personal life. You must:

​

Be open and honest with our mother about her abusive behavior towards you and your children over the decades.

You must seek mental health intervention and treatment for her, to include medication and therapy. She is sick. She has been sick for a long time. She is long overdue for psychological help. Your enabling of her abusive and unhealthy habits is only going to further isolate you and her and compound her mental illness, as well as present detrimental effects to your own mental health, if they haven’t already.

She must commit to A.) Admitting the abuses she’s done to you, your family, her family, and all of her children and B.) Following through with her mental health treatment. No half-measures. No quitting. She is sick, and she has been sick for as long as I can remember. She will not ever get better or be better if she does not have your support and encouragement throughout what will likely be a very sordid and difficult treatment. She will not get better or be better if she doesn’t commit to seeking treatment for, what is likely, the rest of her life.

You need to finally own up to your own flaws, too. You have gaslighted us, your kids, and told us that the abuses and trauma we have endured from our mother and you have not happened; that we are liars and that are “ungrateful”. You have enabled your wife’s abuses by turning a blind eye to them. No longer.

BONUS: If you could at least try to understand that your politics are not only harmful to humanity at large, but to your children and grandchildren, as well, it’d be fucking nice to see you apply some critical-fucking-thinking to the ideology you’ve so mindlessly given yourself to.

Here’s the thing, [CENSORED NAME], I may be the only kid that’s cut you out of my life so far, but I can guarantee you: I will NOT be the last. [SISTER 1] and [SISTER 2] are tired of you, they are tired of mom, and they are ashamed of you. I tell you this not to hurt you or twist the knife, but to warn you. You have been dangerously close to losing them the way you have lost me for years. Every time one of your ignorant political rants shows up on their Facebook feed, every time you harass them about wishing mom a happy birthday, or harass their ex-husbands on Facebook, every little stupid and inconsiderate act you take, is pushing them closer to the ends I have taken to separate myself, my family, and my children from you.

As the status quo stands right now; you and mom are toxic. And I cannot in good faith bring people like you around my children. You did enough damage to me and my siblings. I won’t let you hurt my children, too.

You’ve already missed out on nearly the first two years of [CENSORED WIFE'S NAME] and I’s daughters’ lives, and [CENSORED SON'S NAME] has no idea who you people are. I am certain they cannot tell the difference without your influence in their lives. Can you?

I am not an unreasonable person, and I do not ask for anything that is out of your realm of capability or power; I am not asking for the clocks to be turned back and for you to undo the years of abuse and trauma you and mom inflicted on us. I am not the hateful and ungrateful son you have painted me to be. I may be stubborn and rebellious, but I am not without reason or compassion.

Your Stubborn and Rebellious Son, Take Him to the Elders at the Gate of Town For His Stoning,

- [CENSORED NAME]

[optiotriarii-blog]

Discussion: White Culture?

For my first discussion, I would like to address a type of question I’ve lately heard asked with increasing frequency from a certain type of person. These simple inquiries, asked so innocently and yet so insistently, tend toward the following: “Why don’t we have a White History Month?” or “Why aren’t there Straight Pride parades?” or “Why can’t we celebrate White Culture?” For these myriad questions, I have all manner of explanations, and those parties concerned can take their pick. I will endeavor to elucidate as clearly as I can, and perhaps these questions will come up less in the future.

First of all, there is no such thing as White Culture. The relevant definitions of the word culture, in this case, would be “the behaviors and characteristics of a particular social, ethnic, or age group,” or “the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts, letters, manners, scholarly pursuits, etc.” There is no White Civilization. There is no nation called White. There was never a Mighty White Empire. There is American culture, there is Irish culture, there is Texan culture. These are groups of people that live in the same area and share lore, exchange ideas, and develop new concepts.

White history (or, as modern society calls it, “History”) is already observed all the time. The reason we study women’s history and the reason we observe Black History Month is that, in general, our records skew to focus on the individual contributions of specifically white and male people, even to the point of ignoring the contributions of other cultures. For example, American children are taught that white settlers established colonies  on the East Coast, but textbooks and teachers  often neglect to mention that we occupied the empty buildings left behind by Native Americans that were wiped out by plague. Only in recent years, specifically because we have made an extra effort to make note of important minority figures, have we become aware as a whole of their contributions.

It is easy to see where a situation like this could lead a member of the uninformed majority to assume that this is some sort of bizarre favoritism. If a person is brought up being told that virtually all of human progress was facilitated by their ethnicity, it would be easy for that person to think that their ethnicity’s history deserves greater focus, which would then lead to subsequent generations placing greater importance on their place in history, creating a sort of feedback loop. What must be remembered is that history is written by the victors. Those in power will always seek to vindicate their place at the top. It is not enough to simply be fortunate; we must be fortunate because we are the best.

But is there a Black Culture? There is no Nation of Black, no Black Empire, but there is Black Culture. European settlers created it when we abducted countless thousands of people from their original cultures and homelands and forced them to find solidarity with one another, creating their own culture in the face of adversity. As a displaced people rejected and treated as less than human by the rest of America, African Americans created a culture of their own. Because black Americans, regardless of original nationality and creed, were lumped into a community, they were forced to create their own culture within our nation.

This can similarly be seen in Pride celebrations. For much of history in most of the world (to this day, in some places) homosexuality was against the law. It was illegal for people to be who they were. They were legally barred from the same rights as other people. They were forced to create their own subculture, their own community, in which they did not have to lie to gain acceptance and safety. In this way, they created their own cultural values.

But why celebrate a culture, some might ask? Why celebrate something you were simply born with? One does not choose an ethnicity any more than one chooses any other inherited trait. When a person is excessively boastful of their intelligence or their looks, they are seen as prideful or vain. To understand why we celebrate Black Culture, or Pride, we must examine the nature of the celebrations more closely.

The theme or motif seen most frequently in celebrations of culture is a triumph or a defiance of adversity. The Fourth of July celebrates Americans declaring themselves free from the British. The Irish and Italians celebrate their culture because they were considered persona non grata in our nation for a very long time. Black History and Pride are similar celebrations. They are not simply a demographic patting themselves on the back for being born; they are a celebration of the triumphs of these cultures over adversity and a reminder of the battle that continues to be fought.

These calls for Straight Pride parades and for celebrations of White History might be met with less incredulity if there were examples of systematic oppression of either demographic in history, or if American modern society did not already, by default, cater to the needs and wants of straight white people, and if these questions did not always come up as a reaction to mention of celebrations of the cultures of minorities, rather than coming up on their own. It might even lead a person to doubt that these questions are asked in good faith.

This is not to say that there is not adversity to overcome in every person’s life, and one might say that it is unfair that one culture or demographic’s triumphs over adversity are given more focus than those of others, but even given these qualifiers, in the context of history, the questions posed seem silly. If I am given a week off from work with pay because my mother died, and you ask why you don��t get time off work with pay because you need time to read your favorite books, it implies to me that you consider your lack of reading time an equal hardship to my loss of a defining figure in my life.

In addition to this, in our world today there exist numerous groups that advocate and actively campaign to restrict the rights of African Americans and members of the LGBTQ community, and many others who are more concerned with the hate groups’ right to propagate hate than the rights of the minority to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These people, interestingly enough, will also often be the people who are asking questions about Straight Pride and White History Month. This would lead any reasonable person to believe that such people might value the rights of straight white people over the rights of others, which looks like an unfair bias, or a prejudice. (Racism. The word is racism.).

I hope my first essay has been helpful to those who were confused. There is a lot more I could say about this, but I’ll leave it at this for now. It’s obviously not a discussion just one person, so please, by all means, ask questions. Discuss with me.

[magicianmew]

On the complexity of words in our racialized and colonialized world, and my own liminality...

TW: Discussion of the term “g*psy,” which I know may be a triggering word to some of my American followers in particular. I’ve done my best to tag this. Let me know if I’ve left something out.

So I need to talk about this. I really don’t want to because I feel like I’m going to be attacked for doing so. But this is my life in a super literal way, and I am taking time to process all this, with my cultural background, and my personal history, and my non-belonginess, and all the other super heavy baggage I have, and my society has, with this word and this way of life.

I’ve seen the occasional post on here talking about the culture on Tumblr of sometimes oversimplifying their activism and not understanding the full breadth of certain issues, and I’m kicking myself for it even as I type, but… today I’d like to address the international complexity of the term “gypsy.” Specifically, its use in the UK.

(Oh god, what am I doing sticking my foot in this hornet’s nest…)

All I ask is that you really just read this before you rip my head off, yeah? Please. I need to talk about this.

That word does not mean the same thing here that it means in the US, where I come from.

In America, it’s a pretty negative word to a lot of people of any degree of social consciousness. In America, that word is associated almost exclusively with the Romani people, an extremely marginalized group of POC who’ve been subject to every type of violence in existence, up to and including genocide. It is almost always used as either a slur, or an ignorantly appropriative capitalist tool. They’re the only well-known group of nomadic people Americans are familiar with in relatively modern times (since most nomadic Natives were killed or had their seasonal routes cut off long ago), and naturally, it has therefore remained a very racialized term in America. As a general rule, all nomadic peoples known to Americans are POC who have suffered genocide, sometimes to the point of extinction.

It’s fucking heavy. And that is what my brain still emotionally understands, when I hear that word. I’ve felt, and feel, that ickiness listening to someone use that word carelessly, or as if it were a trendy aesthetic™. This post is hard to write, because I have to use it.

So, Americans, I get this. ‘K? Me too. And Brits, if you’ve ever wondered why this strikes such a chord with Americans, that’s why, and this might be some handy knowledge for you to have when traveling to the US: “gypsy” is not a nice word in the US, and “Traveller” isn’t a term most Americans will recognize. We don’t have any legislation protecting Traveller rights, the way you do (inadequate as they may be). If you want to refer to the Romani, use Romani. If you want to refer to Travellers as a diverse group, use “nomadic people.”

But now I live in the UK. In the UK, “gypsy” is a government-official term, and people refer to themselves and others by this term routinely. And most confusingly, to my American sensibilities, it has little to do with your ethnicity. Even ethnic gypsies are most frequently white British, in the UK (the UK has its own native nomadic populations, especially from Ireland and Scotland). But there are also non-ethnic gypsies. It’s a term that refers more to your mode of living than to your race.

My gypsy neighbors are Irish, English, and Romani. The Irish Travellers and Romani obviously have an ethnic history of nomadism. But the ethnically English do not. He’s a Traveller, legally speaking, and part of larger gypsy society. And here, that is legally and culturally legitimate. He isn’t considered an ethnic minority, the way ethnic Travellers are, but culturally has a home under both terms.

There are other slurs in the UK for Travellers, of course. And there are also people who talk about them in a racist way (*cough* Tories *cough*). If I were to draw a comparison to American linguistics, “gypsy” in the UK is much like “queer” in America. It is simultaneously a neutral and inclusive word, and a word which is often found in the mouth of bigots. It has a complex history that has both highs and lows.

I still prefer to use Traveller, because I’m American and “gypsy” leaves a weird taste in my mouth. But that only works in writing, where it is capitalized. In speech, that term could just as easily mean kids on a gap year, and it isn’t useful for specifying nomadic people. So in speech… the word everyone uses is “gypsy.” This word which gives me the willies is now a normal part of my life. It is hard for me to get used to that. But also, apprehensively positive. What a wonderful community this is. It isn’t any stupid stereotypes. I mean, the dude a couple caravans down from me is a graphic designer. It’s just a really solid community of people who are just… really wonderful.

So… this is a major part of my existence right now. Please remember that Tumblr is an international community. Not everyone you see using that word is a racist throwing out a slur. Some of them aren’t even referring to the Romani. If they’re British, they’re probably more likely to be referring to the Irish, or to people of diverse or unknown ethnic backgrounds.

It may also be something I start talking about more often, because this is now my life. I live on wheels, in a mostly Traveller community. Legally, I’m a “New Traveller” (and the idea of referring to myself that way sends off a degree of appropriative heebjeebies that’s just unbelievable, but that is the fact of the matter). That is, I would be if anyone knew I was here. But the way these things are interacting for me, and how simultaneously uncomfortable and necessary it is to learn about them given my cultural background, means that it is something that is likely to come up. Something I will need to talk about. A consuming part of my life at the moment.

These people have taken me in, in a very real way that pretty much makes me cry when I think about it. They’ve fed me, and kept me warm, and helped me keep this hell shed from tipping over. They’ve gifted me things for my craft – the part of my life this blog is about. I don’t want to avoid talking about them as they talk about themselves, or understanding the way my self-perception is changing as this is happening, for fear I’ll be mistaken for an asshole. It feels like hiding who they proudly are, because the culture I come from has a different history than they do. I don’t live in that culture anymore, and probably never will again. I need to find some way of reconciling the dissonance with the way my life is now.

I don’t think any of this takes away from the complexity of that term. And to all you goddamn Nazis, don’t you dare take this as a reason why it’s ok to fucking harass the Romani, or I swear I will hex the shit out of you. And since the UK tends to follow American trends, I wouldn’t be surprised if that term eventually goes out of vogue.

But today, it is a very different word from its American counterpart, which is essential for me to fully understand in the context of both my own life, and my experience of adopting my new culture as an immigrant. And I want people to understand where I and other people in Britain are coming from when we talk about it. And I feel a need to be understood in my own life right now.

So… This was probably unwise. I’ll take my blows I guess. I’m just reaching into the dark and hoping I’ll find some understanding. This is very much part of what kind of witch I’m becoming, and more broadly, what kind of human I’m becoming.

[ladystylestores]

Death and Testing – The New York Times

Want to get The Morning by email? Here’s the sign-up.

Good morning. The son of a federal judge has been killed. Canada says no to Major League Baseball. And Trump tells multiple virus falsehoods in a T.V. interview.

President Trump gave a confrontational interview to Chris Wallace of Fox News yesterday that included numerous untruths about the coronavirus. Trump claimed that the United States had the lowest death rate in the world; that new cases were surging here mostly because of the large number of tests; and that his virus response had saved “millions of lives.”

So I thought it was worth offering a quick overview of the actual situation with the virus, with help from a couple of charts:

The virus has still been deadlier in several European countries than in the U.S., after adjusting for population. But the total death rate in the U.S. is among the worst for any country in the world:

And the U.S. may continue to climb this ranking. Most high-income countries now have a relatively small number of new cases and deaths each day, while the U.S. does not:

The U.S. is conducting a large number of tests — but that isn’t why the virus statistics look so much worse here. According to Johns Hopkins University, the U.S. has now conducted more tests per capita than any other country.

That high test rate obviously leads to a greater number of official cases. If some other countries with major outbreaks, like Brazil, Mexico and Nigeria, were conducting more tests, they would likely be reporting many more cases. Some would probably show worse per capita outbreaks than the U.S.

But the U.S. is still an outlier, especially among rich countries. A higher percentage of its tests are coming back positive than in many other countries, and the death toll continues to mount, which are both signs that the main issue in the U.S. is a failure to control the virus.

Related: One sign of Trump’s unsuccessful strategy is that other top Republican officials are increasingly willing to defy him about the virus.

In Europe: A new Times story examines Europe’s early failure to control the virus. And Ruchir Sharma, an investor and contributing Opinion writer, argues that Germany’s success in controlling the virus has made it “the large economy most likely to thrive in the post-pandemic world.”

FOUR MORE BIG STORIES

1. The virus rips through Texas

In the Rio Grande Valley, on Texas’ southern border, more than a third of families live in poverty. Nearly half of the residents have no health insurance, and obesity and heart disease are widespread.

Now coronavirus cases there are surging, threatening to overwhelm hospitals and create a public-health disaster. “Our curve is a straight up trajectory right now,” one hospital official said. “There’s no relief.” A photo essay accompanies our story from the region.

In other virus developments:

As companies across China rush to produce personal protective equipment, some are using Uighur labor that puts members of the ethnic minority to work against their will.

More than six million people in the U.S. enrolled in food stamps in the first three months of the pandemic, an unprecedented rise.

The Canadian government will not allow the Toronto Blue Jays to stage home games when the baseball season starts this week, saying cross-border travel poses a health risk. The team is likely to play at a minor-league stadium in Buffalo instead.

2. How Roberts has shaped voting rights

John Roberts solidified his reputation during this past Supreme Court term as an idiosyncratic justice willing to vote with his liberal colleagues on some major issues. But one subject on which he has remained a stalwart conservative is also one that’s likely to matter a great deal in 2020: voting rights.

In its recent term, the Supreme Court issued four rulings to restrict voting rights. All of the rulings were decided quickly, in response to emergency applications asking the justices to take action in pending cases, as The Times’s Adam Liptak explains. Those rulings indicate that the court may choose not to act this fall to make sure people can vote during a pandemic.

3. Federal forces roil Portland

Protests against racism and police brutality have endured in Portland, Ore., with peaceful marches during the day and more confrontational, and occasionally violent, demonstrations at night. And the recent deployment of federal officers to quash the protests seems to have had the opposite effect.

Demonstrations over the weekend drew the largest crowds in weeks, uniting a diverse group of activists in outrage. “I wasn’t even paying attention to the protests at all until the feds came in,” said Christopher David, a former Navy civil engineering corps officer.

4. Pain for businesses big and small

They survived the Great Depression, a world war and the 2008 financial crisis — but not the pandemic. Small businesses that have stood for a century are shutting down, ending generations of family ownership.

And at big businesses: C.E.O.s of some major companies say they are increasingly worried about a prolonged economic disruption. “I’m less optimistic today than I was 30 days ago,” the chief executive of Marriott International said.

Here’s what else is happening

A gunman shot and killed the 20-year-old son of a federal judge as he answered the door of the family home in New Jersey yesterday and wounded the judge’s husband. The judge, Esther Salas, was home but was not injured.

Roger Stone, the Trump ally whose prison sentence the president commuted, denied he uttered a racial slur during an interview with a Black radio host. The audio suggests otherwise.

Trader Joe’s said it would rebrand international food items with names like Trader Ming’s, Trader José and Trader Giotto’s. An online petition had asked the company to remove packaging that reflects “a narrative of exoticism that perpetuates harmful stereotypes.”

Lives Lived: Nakotah LaRance’s skill as a hoop dancer — a tradition in some Native American cultures — carried him to world titles, late-night TV, the Brooklyn Ballet and Cirque du Soleil. LaRance died last week at 30.

Subscribers help make Times journalism possible. To support our efforts, please consider subscribing today.

IDEA OF THE DAY: Should Biden go big?

Joe Biden’s polling lead has grown large enough that some Democrats are debating whether he should spend resources in traditionally Republican states in an effort to win a landslide victory. Here are the cases that each side is making:

No, don’t you remember 2016? Four years ago, Hillary Clinton campaigned in North Carolina, Texas and other states she didn’t need to win, while paying relatively little attention to Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — which she did need. Biden must avoid that same trap, some people argue.

“Lock down the states you MUST have by making sure your operations and ads are funded there for duration. THEN you expand to more ambitious targets,” tweeted David Axelrod, Barack Obama’s former strategist. For now, the Biden campaign is largely taking this path.

Yes, 2020 is a chance for realignment. Trump doesn’t just trail by almost 10 percentage points. He is also facing the prospect of a summer and a fall with a raging pandemic and a deep recession. Given all this, some people are urging Biden to flip states that Democrats have long dreamed of winning — and to help flip the Senate.

Unless the Democrats also win the Senate, they have little chance of passing major legislation. To win the Senate, they will need to win seats in some Republican-leaning states, like North Carolina, Montana, Georgia and Texas.

“When reliable polling has you tied or winning in Texas, you expand the map well beyond the six ‘battleground’ states,” the Democratic strategist Christy Setzer has said. Added Stacey Abrams, the Georgia politician: “The Sun Belt expansion is what will drive the next 30 years of elections.”

PLAY, WATCH, EAT, BINGE

A fresh summer salad

Our original recipe for chickpea salad with fresh herbs and scallions says the dish “deserves a spot at your next picnic.” While festive picnics may be hard to come by this summer, don’t let that stop you from making this lighter take on a potato salad. Odds are, it tastes just as good from the couch.

Making orchestras more inclusive

American orchestras remain among the nation’s least racially diverse institutions: Of the 106 full-time players in the New York Philharmonic, only one is Black.

Anthony Tommasini, The Times’s classical music critic, argues that the so-called blind audition — in which musicians try out for an orchestra behind a screen — is impeding progress. How? There is little difference in skill among the top-tier players competing for these jobs, Tommasini argues. Without blind auditions, ensembles would be able to seek out elite musicians of color.

A TV show like no other

My colleague Sanam Yar recommends tuning into the drama “I May Destroy You”:

Fans of Michaela Coel’s award-winning sitcom “Chewing Gum” — which she wrote and starred in at the age of 28 — already knew she was a singular talent. But her new series, which is airing on HBO in the U.S., cements that status. There are no other shows like “I May Destroy You,” in part because it’s such a specific, personal story, inspired by Coel’s life and her experience with sexual assault.

The series follows a London-based writer and her circle of friends in the aftermath of her assault, and its characters feel exceptionally real. As the show’s writer, co-director and star, Coel displays genius throughout. Some lines of dialogue will catch you off guard and rattle around in your brain for days. And the show’s clever soundtrack feels like its own character.

“I May Destroy You” is a heavy watch, but it also has spots of brightness and beauty. The show gives no easy answers. That’s kind of the point.

Diversions

You can catch Comet NEOWISE — one of the brightest comets in a generation — without a telescope. Here’s how.

Artists like Edwin Birdsong and Ballin’ Jack aren’t household names, but their music is instantly recognizable as the samples behind hit pop songs. Listen to these 15 tracks.

Games

Here’s today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: One of two planets in the solar system that lacks a moon (five letters).

You can find all of our puzzles here.

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. — David

P.S. The words “rematador,” “cortador,” “apeleador” and “planchador” — all titles for artisan makers of Panama hats — appeared in The Times for the first time today, as noted by the Twitter bot @NYT_first_said.

Source link

قالب وردپرس

from World Wide News https://ift.tt/2ODNPsB

[unadulteratedrebelrunaway]

O'HARE VERSUS THE PRESIDENT

[9/4/18].

           The music starts on the television set, and it is tuned into the highest rated network on television.  The theme song is for the O'Hare Factor, and the host is one of the most controversial and well known personalities on television.

           Phil O'Hare is smiling at the camera with a grin that is both strong willed and as cold as ice.  A man can practically keep time to it.  His blue eyes pierce through the viewers with a focused concentration worthy of an inquisitor.

           "Welcome, folks.  This is Phil O'Hare, and this is the highest rated show on television because we always deliver the most accurate and pertinent news for you.  We always offer a fair and balanced approach on these shows, and we are glad that America appreciates the way we do business, which is the right way to do business.  It should be the only way to tell the story, but unfortunately, our media is saturated with a deliberate liberal bias that exists only to favor the far left.  I wished I could say things worked otherwise, but I'm here to do my job, which benefits all you people out there.  Speaking of which, my guest today is one of the most liberal presidents who have ever existed.  I never voted for him, and I never will, but I still respect the man and his opinions, even though he's wrong, because I am a fair and balanced man that always listens to the other side of the argument, provided the other side agrees with me.  Ladies and gentleman, kids too, can we give a warm and generous welcome to President Bahama?"

           Bahama walks out on stage with an air of confidence that few men possess.   He is completely unphased by the crowd's hostility.  He shakes hand with Phil.  "Pleased to meet you.  Always a pleasure."

           "Have a seat, Mr. President," says Phil.  "Should I call you Mr.?"

           "You don't have to call me that," says Bahama.

           "What should I call you?" says Phil.

           "You could call me Doctor President since I have a doctorate," says Bahama.

           "You could call me Master O'Hare, but that would make me feel weird, like I'm supposed to be Batman or something," says Phil.  "Call me Phil.  Are you serious?  Do you really want me to call you, what?  Doctor Bahama?  It makes me feel like you should be wearing a white lab coat and a stethoscope."

           "No," says Bahama.  "I'm just kidding.  My first name might be easy to pronounce but you would be surprised how many people misspell it, so just call me Bahama.  I don't want to embarrass your teleprompter."

           "I think even a simple man like myself, who's worked for everything he ever had, who earned a Master's degree while painting houses, could remember that," says Phil.  "You do know I paid for college painting houses, right?"

           Bahama chuckles.  "I know you worked real hard for your degree, but nobody ever paid for college by painting houses all summer."

           "I did," says Phil.

           "You paid for graduate school painting houses?" says Bahama.  "You must have made some serious money, even back then.  Why didn't you just go into business on a professional basis and make your living painting houses?"

           "It wasn't something I wanted to do," says Phil.  "I figured I was meant for something better and more important, like what I'm doing right now."

           "You got that right," says Bahama.  "Good answer."

           "Anyway, I wanted to talk to you about poverty in general," says Phil.  "I have never heard you say in any of your speeches, I have never heard you talk about preserving the family unit.  I have never heard you address the problem of absentee fathers who are always leaving the family, for whatever reason, like getting drunk and playing the lottery so they can get rich and find a new girlfriend."

           "Before I go through the details of what you just said, I address the family as being vital to society, and as a possible mitigating factor in the elimination of poverty in every speech I have ever given," says Bahama.  "You should listen to one of my speeches sometime and stop tuning out what you don't want to hear."

           "I am extremely objective," says Phil. "After all, you ought to pay attention and read what my show is called sometime."

           Bahama chuckles.  "Okay."

           "What do you think causes this?" says Phil. "I say it is a lack of moral fiber, but what's your take on this?"

           "Be more specific," says Bahama.

           "I'll try to be more specific, the only trouble is I don't know how I can be more specific, but I'll try," says Phil. "Do you think the real reason for the breakup of the family unit, and I think we agree that the family unit is central to the elimination of poverty--."

           "Uh-huh," says Bahama.

           "Do you think," says Phil as he starts to point his pencil in the air, illustrating a point, "do you think, that the primary cause of a father leaving his family is a lack of moral fiber?"

           "There are several causes," says Bahama.

           "Oh yes," says Phil.  "Yes there are, but I'm not asking about numerous causes. I'm only asking if you think that the primary reason why a father deserts his family is because, let's just say, he wants to go out and realize his boyhood dreams because he hates staying home, making an honest living, like in a factory, and exercising a little something I was brought up on called responsibility?"

           "You're saying that moral responsibility is the primary factor," says Bahama.  "Yes, it is important, but there are other reasons that contribute--."

           "But my father never deserted me or my family," says Phil.  "He was an upstanding man because he had morals."

           "Can I ask you a couple of questions first?" says Phil.

           "Shoot," says Phil.

           "Okay," says Bahama.  "Your father was a college professor."

           "Right," says Phil.

           "He was a tenured professor, so they couldn't fire him," says Bahama.

           "I don't see what that has to do with anything, but yes he was, because he deserved it," says Phil.

           "You lived in a house in the suburbs," says Bahama.  "I believe your home was paid off when you were quite young, right?"

           "I'm pretty sure it was," says Phil.

           "Now, your father had the opportunity," says Bahama.

           "That was because my father created his own opportunities," says Phil.

           "Yes, well your father had the opportunity to become a professor because the school he worked at was there in the first place," says Bahama.

           "If it wasn't then he would have found another school," says Phil.

           "What if there wasn't?" says Bahama.

           "Don't be ridiculous," says Phil.  "There are thousands of schools across this great land.  How could there not be a school for my dad to secure an opportunity with?"

           "I'm not saying that," says Bahama.  "What if they wouldn't hire him because of his skin color?"

           "That's even more ridiculous," says Phil.

           "Try and follow me here," says Bahama.  "You know this country has a historical problem when it comes to race relations, don't you?"

           "Now you're just digging up the past," says Phil.  "Over one hundred years ago, we fought a great war to end slavery."

           "I'm not just talking about that," says Bahama. "I'm talking about tribalism, and how African Americans are a minority in this country."

           "Okay," says Phil.  "I'll follow."

           "Now, you know that racism existed in the first place because of tribalism?" says Bahama.

           Phil nods in agreement.

           "Now, we still have tribalism, and we probably always will," says Bahama.  "I wished we could get rid of it worse than you would like to, but it is probably always going to be here.  Take it my word for it.  I hate racism more than you do."

           "I get what you're saying, but I still don't see how any of this is relevant to our discussion," says Phil.

           "Phil, you're Irish, right?" says Bahama.

           Phil folds his arms across his chest. "And proud of it."

           "When your ancestors first came here, oh, probably in the late 1800′s, they were treated with the utmost discrimination at the time, weren't they?" says Bahama.

           "Yes," says Phil.  "I know all about racism and discrimination because I happen to be the offspring of immigrants."

           "We all are, except for the First Nations," says Bahama.

           "Yes, but like me my ancestors had moral fiber, they worked hard and intelligently, they persisted, and they overcame, so to speak. I probably wouldn't be here today if I didn't come from a long line of industrious and moral people."

           "But your skin color is the same as an Englishman, a German, or any other person of northern European descent," says Bahama. "You're skin is white.  But what if it was different from everybody else?"

           "It's not," says Phil.

           "What if it was?" says Bahama.  "You see, there have been many people in Hollywood who had to change their names in years past.  Many Jewish people, back when we were Anti-Semitic.  Many of our greatest entertainers never would have been given a chance to entertain us.  I'll assume that you feel you have benefited from many of those great actors. Am I right?"

           "So what you're saying is, I've benefited from many of these Jewish performers, but I never would have experienced those benefits if they never would have become professional actors, all because their names were Jewish?" says Phil.  "My ancestors never had to change their names just because they had O's and Mc's at the beginning.  That disproves what you're saying."

           "Phil, you're people blended in with the native crowd once you got past the first generation," says Bahama.  "Your skin color, language, and ethnic customs were no different from those of the native population.  I mentioned Jewish people, on the other hand, who are usually white, but then you have to remember that many Germans, many Polish, many Italians, also changed their names, especially those of Eastern European descent.  Most people couldn't even pronounce or spell their names right, much let alone become friends with any of them."

           "Yeah, but my people never had to change their names," says Bahama.

           "Actually, many of them have," says Bahama.  "There are numerous accounts of Irish people dropping the O's and the Mc's because of discrimination.  You see, people like people who are similar to them."

           "Yes," says Phil.  "I see you're coming around and finally admitting that my people are a minority who were discriminated against, kind of like black people."

           "A white person can change their name to assimilate but a black man can change his name to William Howard Taft, or Franklin Delano Roosevelt, or even Abe Lincoln or George Washington, but everything else will still be exactly the same," says Bahama.

           "I see what you're saying, but we're no longer racist," says Phil.

           "We are," says Bahama..

           "What I'm saying is we are no longer as racist," says Phil.

           "Saying we are no longer as racist is like saying the New York Yankees are a bad team because they are no longer winning the World Series every year," says Bahama.

           "Don't you think that's an unfair analogy?" says Phil.

           "Or taking somebody out of a burning building and placing them into an oven that's set at 250 degrees Fahrenheit," says Bahama.  "They're no longer being broiled, but they're still getting cooked alive."

           "Oh come off it," says Phil.  "That was all hundreds of years ago."

           "I want to redirect the topic here," says Bahama.  "We started off talking about the possibility of eliminating poverty."

           "And you turned it into a race issue," says Phil.

           "Race is relevant to the topic, but there are numerous white people, along with other races and ethnicities, who live below the poverty line," says Bahama.  "Before I go into that, I'll just say that if your father's skin didn't quite match up with what most other people had; life would have turned out very different for him, you, and the rest of your family."

           "He got it because he was moralistic and he worked hard," says Phil.

           "The thing I want to point out is people need opportunity," says Bahama.  "If there was a stronger small business presence in the ghetto, or any other place that's poor, then it would become possible to take a huge bite out of poverty, along with its associated problems."

           "Wait a minute," says Phil.  "I want to back up a minute.  My dad, along with my ancestors, they got what they did for the reasons I just stated."

           "And I'm telling you that I have to take into account all other factors, and not just moral fiber," says Bahama.

           "So you're saying that morals and values are unimportant," says Phil.

           "I didn't say that," says Bahama.  "I said values are only a part of the equation."

           "So we can agree that moral fiber is an important factor when it comes to eliminating poverty?" says Phil.

           "I've been saying that all along," says Bahama. "Yes we can."

           "Excellent," says Phil.  He rubs his hands together impishly.  "You said you also wanted to talk about small business, as in a small business presence in poor communities.  Do you mean like Harlem?"

           "Not just Harlem, Phil," says Bahama.  "There are numerous communities across this country, places with a strong Irish presence, mind you, that can't afford many of the things that guys like you and I take for granted."

           "That's because of the taxes," says Phil.  "If you would only cut taxes then we can have all the small businesses we want."

           "Actually, Phil, there are several reasons why it is hard to start a small business, and whenever taxes are cut, usually only the richest people and largest businesses get the tax cuts."

           "I deserve a tax cut because I earned it," says Phil.

           "Okay, so let's just say I'll focus on large businesses then?" says Bahama.

           Agreed," says Phil, "but when a large business moves into town, like Wal-Mart, then that means jobs.  Many jobs for anyone who wants to work, so there's no excuse for people to be on welfare."

           "Phil, those are temporary, low paying jobs," says Bahama.  "Do you have any idea what the turnover is for people who work at those places?  If we want to do something about poverty then we have to nip it in the bud."

           "That's what I'm saying," says Phil.

           "Yes, but you're saying we should cut taxes on the big players like Wal-Mart," says Bahama.  "I'm talking about increasing the opportunity for people with a skill to own and operate their own business."

           "Just cut their taxes and you'll have plenty of them," says Phil.

           "Phil, the reason why it is so hard to operate a small business in this country is because the government is quite hostile to small business," says Bahama.  "Sometimes, it requires an attorney to start and operate one.  There are a myriad of statutes and regulations at the federal, state, and local level.  It practically requires a full-time compliance officer just to keep up with them.  Most small businessmen do not have the time or the money to do so."

           "So what do you suggest?" says Phil.

           "Phil, if I had my way I would streamline the entire process," says Bahama.

           "Streamline how?" says Phil.

           "For one thing, I wished I could make the IRS require small business owners to file taxes only once, instead of four times a year, stop fining people for paying too much in taxes, or paying too early," says Bahama.

           "Okay," says Phil.  "That would be good."

           "Here's another idea," says Bahama.  "I would like to make all interested parties, from the federal government down to the owners, sit down, and hash out a bunch of stipulations.  Agreements that would have to be ratified by all interested parties, and not that top down crap we already have too much of.  I would like what is best for America.  I would like to use my position to enforce this, and get the parties to draw up and sign a written contract.  That way, small businessman could have a fighting chance.  Pay one tax to one the IRS, and let the IRS allocate to the other taxing authorities.  And please stop fining the little guys tens of thousands of dollars just because he made an honest mistake.  This is a free country, so let's start acting like one.  If our government became more small business friendly, we would all be better off.  When a small businessman survives; society benefits as a whole."

           "Benefits how?" says Phil.

           "Like a lower violent street crime rate, less drug abuse and addiction, higher home ownership, and several other benefits," says Bahama.

           "Good neighborhoods exist because of their moral fiber," says Bahama.  "You know--the collective moral fiber."

           "Phil, you have to look at all the available data," says Bahama.  "Not only that, but you have the evidence in front of you if you ever looked. Neighborhoods need to have moral fiber, but they also need to have opportunities.  Both are necessary.  Anyplace that is lacking in either one of these fundamentals happens to be run down. That is why urban ghettos are always crime ridden."

           "I'll have to look at that sometime," says Phil. "You have all these great ideas. If your ideas are so great then what's stopping you?"

           "Both chambers of Congress," says Bahama, "the Federal Reserve, and the United States Supreme Court.  Remember, they shot down everything F.D.R. did over his first hundred days."

           "I already know that," says Phil.

           "You probably also know that F.D.R. was the first president in history to go four years without making one appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court?" says Bahama.

           "Yes I did," says Phil.

           "Did you also know that besides the speeches he made that he was actually a do-nothing president for his first term?" says Bahama.

           "I do, but what's your point exactly?" says Phil

           "Phil, I don't run this country," says Bahama. "The guys I just listed do. The point about F.D.R. is he wanted to pack the U.S. Supreme Court after they found everything he accomplished unconstitutional.  The only problem was Congress wasn't going to let him.  His own party, Phil, ran Congress, and they didn't even care if he got reelected."

           "That's the first time anyone has ever put it to me like that," says Phil.  "We'll be right back after this break, people."

 ***

             "Welcome back, people.  This is Phil O'Hare, along with President Bahama, and this is the most watched program on television.  We were just talking about poverty, its causes, and some of its solutions.  We, I mean I, want to get right down to the nitty gritty.  Would you consider yourself to be the most liberal president we've ever had?"

           "No," says Bahama.

           "Do you consider yourself to be one of the most liberal?" says Phil.

           "I would like to think so, but no," Bahama.

           "Not even a little?" says Phil.

           "Not at all," says Bahama.

           "Why did you say I would like to think so, but no?" says Phil.

           "When I was first elected, I thought I could be the next Lyndon Baines Johnson; however, once I got a couple of months into the first term--."

           "Sort of like the first one hundred days," says Phil.

           "Yes," says Bahama.  "I started to realize why ideology doesn't work."

           "What's wrong with ideology?" says Phil.

           "Ideology is theory; pragmatism is experience," says Bahama.

           "So what you're saying is--."

           "What I'm saying is since I'm the C.E.O. of this country I cannot try to serve only one group of people," says Bahama.

           "That would be good," says Phil

           "Or even some groups of people," says Bahama. "I have to serve the best interests of the nation, and its people."

           "I guess I'm glad to hear that," says Phil. "If you're not the most liberal president, then who would you say is?"

           "Probably Nixon," says Bahama.

           "Nixon?" says Phil.  "Really?"

           "Think about it," says Bahama.  "He established the E.P.A.  He never abolished the NLRB, much to the dismay of the big business conservatives."

           "Like you said a few minutes ago, he couldn't have run the country, and Congress was under the domination of the Democrats," says Phil.  "They were probably going to impeach him, although it would have been for something that wasn't such a big deal."

           "Watergate was a big deal, but I'm not going to waste time on it," says Bahama.  "Remember that Reagan had Congress for a few years, and George W. Bush had Congress for roughly six years, at least he had the House for that, and none of those guys so much as given the NLRB a slight shave, so none of our presidents are what you would call a liberal, or a conservative.  To find that, you would have to go back to the time between Hoover and Coolidge, and you can see what serving only certain groups while ignoring the good of the national whole will get you."

           "I agree with that," says Phil.  "I might not agree with your exact positions on many of the issues, but I will agree with the part about doing what is best for America.  People, I'm sorry but we're running out of time.  President Bahama, it's been a pleasure."

           "Thank you, Phil," says Bahama.

           "So long, and remember we are the most watched program because we deliver both sides of the story, in a fair and balanced way. The way the news is supposed to be delivered.  Not like the way the liberal biased media delivers it.  So long people, and thanks for making us the number one network on television."

THE END

[nightrainlily]

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 12.0px} span.s1 {font-kerning: none} span.s2 {text-decoration: underline ; font-kerning: none} span.Apple-tab-span {white-space:pre}

DAY TWO: A KILO OF KöRSBäR/SOME THOUGHTS ON IMMIGRATION POLICY

my last trip to Sweden was such a whirlwind, so shocking and alien, that I’m feeling rather empty and dumb here now. I remember having so much to say in my first few blog posts, so full of epiphanies. now, I’m struck by a sense of familiarity, rather than disbelief and wonder. of course, Sweden is no less wonderful; rather, I am accustomed to its beauty, which is both sad and comforting. every single thing was so new and exciting I felt that I could write paragraphs about each one.

which is exactly what I did, but facts aside, the feeling itself of returning to a place you remember as if from another life is like being in a nice dream. when I woke up this morning to the sun rising, I remembered that I slept better here than anywhere else, because there is no sound—I’ve never experienced such perfect silence as that of Nyhamnsläge. the air smelled like the sea and the branches waved good morning from outside the open window. I saw Celia making coffee in the kitchen and knew there was Oatly jordgubb yoghurt waiting for me in the fridge. literally since the moment I woke up, I’ve found myself smiling at the beautiful scenery, at the people I didn’t realize I missed, at the excitement I’m feeling about being in Sweden again.

a motif: someone will start to tell a story, and I’ll say, I remember that, I remember that fact or story or conversation. since coming to Sweden, I’ve been consistently able to recognize the language when it’s being spoken around me, which is rare, but I picked up very little in my time here. the words I do remember are for strawberry (jordgubbe), raspberry (hallon), blueberry (blåbär), wild strawberry (smultron), cherry (körsbär), and ice cream (glass). you can tell where my priorities were, and are.

of course, I can also say “takk” and “varsågod” like any good houseguest, but I don’t think I can count to eight like I used to. even though I basically gave up on learning swedish when I arrived, I still picked up a few words in my time here. I imagine that if I spent a year here, and dedicated myself to understanding and speaking, I might be able to speak passable swedish. Amalia keeps telling me “you’re a native!” when I say “hej” to every passing neighbor. I told Joelle to try it, because it makes you feel really good when someone says “hej hej” back and thinks you’re a Swede for a half second.

we went for a hike up the mountain where we snorkeled last time. the trees were so green and the ocean was so blue. everything here, from the houses to the sky to the people, is just a little more vibrant. I remember being so pleased with the blue-green hues of Sweden on my last trip, and I’m pleased to report that they haven’t faded one bit.

Joelle and I went for a run this morning along the same path that I ran two summers ago. I took a snapchat video at the same tree-lined stretch. Amalia has been gone for a whole year on exchange in Australia and she said nothing changed while she was away. I have to agree; this place seems untouched by the chaos of the changing political, economic, and societal planes. while of course I have a surface-level view of Sweden, from a single small village for a short period of time, I still hope that this observation holds true—that Sweden can hold out against the pressures of racism and bigotry that grip America and other nations around the world.

but I’m told that Sweden, too, is headed for a more harsh policy on immigration and naturalization of refugees. I’m going to try to get this part right, even though I’m obviously not a native and have a limited view of the laws surrounding this issue. I recently read a New York Times article (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/01/world/europe/denmark-immigrant-ghettos.html) that detailed the proposed new immigration processes for Danish migrants. the most striking facet of the legislation is the required separation of “ghetto children” from their families for education in Danish culture, traditions, and values. many Danish citizens feel that their culture is being diluted by the heavy influx of refugees, most of them Muslim, due to the language barriers and unwillingness of immigrants to assimilate into mainstream Danish society. their systems, and that of other Nordic nations, crafted for small homogeneous populations, have bent and buckled under the weight of immigrant populations, often seeking asylum from war. while they have previously had more liberal immigration policies, many Nordic countries were struggling with loud dissent as early as 2012 from their right-wing parties, who suggested and then implemented the reduction of immigrants’ rights.

Swedish elections are coming up, and it seems likely that their conservative party, with conservative views on border control, will win either the majority or at least a good amount of seats in the government. if a minor comes to Sweden, it is the right of their family to join them, a loophole which is often abused by immigrant families. refugees cannot work until they obtain a visa, a process that, while incomparable to the states’ nearly impossible and nearly infinite own visa procedure, takes a good amount of time. during that purgatory period, they receive welfare and support from the programs put in place to act as a safety net for Swedish citizens. Swedes who pay into these systems are voicing their concerns about immigrants using this welfare to avoid work and maintain housing, etc. they have also had issues with migrant smugglers, who inflict human rights violations on their charges and pocket their welfare benefits in exchange for safe passage into Sweden. because Denmark and other countries have recently narrowed their policies, Sweden has taken on more immigrants than ever, and the problems have worsened in turn.

these nations are among the world’s richest, happiest, and most stable. but they’re quickly becoming divided over issues of refugee policy, and Sweden faces an upcoming fork in the road. are Nordic countries so successful and copacetic because their populations are bound by ethnic and cultural ties? or do their programs simply need to be retrofitted to serve a growing population? are increases in crime, gang violence, and racial tensions due entirely to the refugee crisis, or is it just one cause among many?

the Swedish welfare state is oft cited as a model for success by democratic parties in western countries. but these systems would have to be modified for larger communities, communities which are extremely diverse and come from wildly disparate backgrounds. if they do indeed depend on the sense of community each member feels with another, it’s unclear if they’re scaleable at all. but I applaud the Swedes for attempting to accommodate the victims of war.

some resources:

1. https://www.government.se/491b2f/contentassets/84c1ec8c729f4be384a5ba6dddeb0606/swedens-migration-and-asylum-policy

2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/09/09/when-it-comes-to-refugees-scandinavia-isnt-quite-the-promised-land/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.14d166335a1f

to switch gears entirely: this afternoon Joelle, Amalia, and I picked black cherries from a tree. we didn’t even make a dent, and we brought home two large brown paper bags (I say “brought home” because we ate about as many as we picked). and today on our hike, we ate wild raspberries growing on the side of the road. if you know me, you know that I worship at the alter of fruit, especially berries. cherries at home are so expensive and so often mealy or not sweet that I never counted them as one of my favorite fruits, but these babies are succulent and juicy and syrupy. I can’t describe how overjoyed I feel when I pluck a cherry off a branch and pop it directly into my mouth. it feels so good. so, so good.

dinner is calling, despite the kilo of cherries I just consumed. wish me luck,

amaya

1. Après Moi - Regina Spektor

2. Hello Cruel World - Dent May

3. Outside of Space and Time - David Byrne and St. Vincent

4. Living in America - The Sounds

5. July Jones - The New Pornographers

[politicalemail]

Berlin, Germany from info@martinomalley.com

Blue State Digital Mailing Template       : Last week, I traveled to Germany for a conference of progressive leaders hosted by Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SDP) leader, Martin Schulz, who is widely touted as the next Chancellor of Germany. The conference brought together a whole range of party leaders from center to left on the world spectrum of political philosophies. From Europe’s British and Irish Labor Parties to the far left from many continents of the global south. The Prime Ministers of Sweden and Portugal were there along with many others. Scroll down or click here to read my weekly blog post about the eye-opening trip. If you like what you read, click here to donate and support my writing. Have a great week, Martin       Last week, I traveled to Germany for a conference of progressive leaders hosted by Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SDP) leader, Martin Schulz, who is widely touted as the next Chancellor of Germany. The conference brought together a whole range of party leaders from center to left on the world spectrum of political philosophies. From Europe’s British and Irish Labor Parties to the far left from many continents of the global south. The Prime Ministers of Sweden and Portugal were there along with many others. (Sweden’s PM, Stefan Lovfen, confirmed once again that contrary to Donald Trump’s assertions, there had been no terrorist attack on Sweden…) 3/13/17: Governor Martin O’Malley meets with Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Lovfen Robby Mook, formerly of Secretary Clinton’s presidential campaign, had a prominent spot on the conference agenda. He focused primarily on the need to combat cyber espionage, fake news, and Russian troll farms, leaving others to figure out why ethnic hatred and popular despots are on the rise. It seems democracies are voting in increasing numbers for a new generation of race-baiting, authoritarian demagogues. What should we call this new take on an old fear-mongering song? As a descriptor, our European neighbors prefer the word, “populism” over “fascism.” Frankly, I think these new-age fascists are giving populism a bad name. I liked prairie populists such as Iowa’s Tom Harkin, Texas’ Jim Hightower, and populist folk-heroes like Woody Guthrie. But whatever term you choose to call this virulent strain of politics, the common traits are now very familiar to all Americans. Today, these candidates overtly fan anti-immigrant hatred and anti-Muslim fears. They promise to protect the fatherland or the homeland from the less-than-civilized hordes that threaten to steal our nation’s greatness. Sadly, a majority of Americans in a few key states liked it enough to vote for it rather than Hillary Clinton. It’s become a bit of a cookie-cutter appeal across democracies now. Just fill in the blanks for a “superior” race, scapegoated race, and country — the formula is pretty much the same. “Vote for me and I’ll keep THEM from stealing our nation’s greatness.” In Europe, they’ve seen it all before. This, of course, is the ugly brand of politics Donald Trump championed with such skill in our own country. It was great for TV ratings but really bad for democracy. Though in truth, there has always been this dark side to the promise of America. In the past, our major Parties were strong enough to snuff it out before it became a domestic threat to the life of our Republic. Like every school kid in the United States, I remember studying European history. I was taught about the political and economic events that led to World War II: declining wages, despair about the future, loss of national identity and pride. It’s impossible, as a visiting American, to walk through Berlin without thinking of these lessons from history. We were prodded by our teachers then to ask the deeply troubling question, “How could so many seemingly law-abiding people support the rise of fascism with their votes, and many with their lives?” Stumbling Stones in Berlin, Germany marking the homes of Jews who were deported to concentration camps during Nazi rule. In today’s Germany, for the time being, the voters seem to be pushing back against the trend in Europe and America. Martin Schulz and the SDP are actually on the rise in the polls rather than Germany’s new-Nazi Party. Some there attribute this to an anti-Trump backlash. Perhaps our German neighbors understand more acutely than the rest of us how quickly ethnic scapegoating, religious persecution, and white militant nationalism can lead to a lot of really bad things. 3/13/17: Portuguese Prime Minister Antonio Costa, Israeli Knesset Member Michal Biran, Germany’s Social Democratic Party nominee for Chancellor Martin Schulz, a student leader, Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Lofven, and Governor Martin O’Malley (from left to right) Our German hosts are puzzled at how a young, modern, progressive leader like Justin Trudeau could be elected Prime Minister in Canada while America’s President is a knuckle-dragging throwback to the Know Nothing Party of the 1850's. A German civil servant in the Defense Ministry asked me, “How could 63 million Americans have voted for someone like Trump?” A deeply troubling question. America just completed yet another month of positive job creation. This continues the longest streak of consecutive positive monthly job growth in modern American history. Unemployment has been driven down to lows not seen since before the Recession. Labor markets are tightening. Many Americans are finally seeing some modest pay increases. President Obama brought America out of the recession faster than any other country on the planet. Yet, among a great number of white Americans, there is a despair too difficult to name: the sense that my family’s prospects are declining and my country no longer works for me. Globalization, automation, big banks, etc. There must be someone to blame: the lying politicians, the corrupt Parties, the blacks, the Latinos, the Muslims. Please give me another OxyContin. It is one of the great tragedies of our times that the white male suicide rate in the United States of America has never been higher. A well-written piece last week in Vox by Zack Beauchamp asks: “Can there be an economic solution to a crisis of white identity?” In every person there is a desire to be recognized. And a need to be needed. Donald Trump didn’t create the despair and he didn’t create the sense of decline. He just saw the political opportunity. And he tapped into the shadow side of our national character to exploit it. To harness it for himself by turning us against one another. White people can act strangely in our nation when they feel they are about to become a minority in our neighborhoods, schools, churches, cities, country. It’s not rationale. It just is. For now. In truth, this shadow side of our character has been with us since our beginning. Sheltering beneath the robes of Lady Liberty are the twin threats of racial fear and ethnic hate. We are well advised to “beware of them both,” but beware especially of racial fear. In other days, these shadows of our American character perpetuated the horrible institution of slavery. These shadows led to the Trail of Tears, and the genocide of Native Americans. Racial scapegoating, racial genocide, racial injustice. These are the by-products of white militant nationalism run amok in the seasons of fear and hate. We, Americans, are exceptional, but we are not super-human. We can make grave mistakes. And last year we made a series of them which culminated in Donald Trump’s political rise and subsequent inauguration. Let’s hope our exceptional strength, and the exceptional goodness within us, will allow us to correct those mistakes before we lose our Republic. It was American theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr, the son of German immigrants, who said: “Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.” The 2018 mid-terms are just around the corner. More Democratic Governors and more Democratic Statehouses means less time for Donald Trump to enact his agenda. Get more involved in your own State and local Party now. Win back your State, and we will win back our country. Hold strong, America and be encouraged. 3/14/17: In Kurten, Germany, Governor Martin O’Malley dips his hand into the Sulz River, which his maternal family (Suelzer) is named after.   ____________________ Martin O’Malley is the Jerome Lyle Rappaport Visiting Professor at Boston College Law School for the spring 2017 semester. He is teaching a class on Leadership and Data Driven Government, while also participating in several panel discussions as part of the Rappaport Distinguished Public Policy Series. Every Monday he is publishing his thoughts in a series titled, “Letters from Boston.”     Donate                   PAID FOR BY O'SAY CAN YOU SEE PAC NOT AUTHORIZED BY ANY CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATE'S COMMITTEE 421 M St NW Washington, DC 20001Unsubscribe